TRANSPORTATION LAWS CAN AFFECT HEALTH

The goal of transportation law in the U.S. has been simple and clear – spend huge amounts of money to move cars as fast as possible. This policy built the interstate highways and a vast system of urban roads, allowing people to drive everywhere. We do drive a lot, but most of us have no other options. As the federal transportation law comes up for reauthorization, it is time for that focus to shift to stay in step with 21st-century needs.

We Southern Californians are well aware of the downsides of promoting a single mode of transport, from air pollution to worsening congestion, despite many 12- to 18-lane freeways.

As a health researcher, I am particularly concerned about the effects of our car-centric transportation laws on physical activity and chronic disease. Inactive lifestyle is a major cause of health costs and death, through its effects on heart disease, diabetes and cancers. Because of our lovely weather, San Diego County should be heaven for people who would like to ride bicycles or walk, but it is very dangerous because of poor bicycling facilities, inadequate sidewalks and unsafe street crossings. Walking to school has declined from about 41 percent to less than 13 percent, according to a 2007 report that appeared in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Americans have one of the world’s lowest rates of walking and bicycling, according to another study.

That lack of activity spells trouble for a nation already in the grips of an obesity epidemic. A California study showed that obesity rates were about 10 percent in those who drove the least and almost 30 percent in those who drove the most. Another California study showed that children who lived near busy roads gained more weight over eight years than those in low-traffic neighborhoods. Parents report that concern about traffic is one of the main reasons they won’t let their children walk or bike to school. States and cities with the highest percent of people who commute to work by walking and cycling have lower rates of obesity and diabetes.

It is time for our leaders to update the 1950s vision of transportation only by car, and there is hope. Though the automobile-centric House bill can safely be called a pro-obesity law, the current Senate bill is somewhat better. The Senate transportation committee, co-chaired by California’s Barbara Boxer and Oklahoma’s James Inhofe, would retain support for walking, bicycling and public transit (which includes a lot of walking), but at a reduced level. Better, it includes a “complete streets” approach that would consider the needs of all users in federally funded road projects, including pedestrians, bicyclists and people with disabilities. The Senate bill could be improved by continuing the current modest level of dedicated funding for bicycling and walking and other healthy transportation programs, such as Safe Routes to School. We’re only talking about 1 percent to 2 percent of the total funding, which is not enough investment in active, healthy, safer transportation.

Why should walking and bicycling be a life-threatening choice? It is not acceptable to spend billions of dollars to pursue outdated policies that would make health problems worse and add to the federal deficit by increasing health care costs. We need a 21st-century transportation vision that gives people transportation options, encourages walking and bicycling, and makes it safer for kids to walk to school.

Sallis is a Distinguished Professor of Family & Preventive Medicine at UCSD.